We performed a comparison between VMware Tanzu Observability by Wavefront and WhatsUp Gold based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: VMware Tanzu Observability has better support, deployment and integration capabilities, including with open-source container platforms. Although WhatsUp Gold is affordable and easy to set up, it lacks real-time monitoring and configuration management features, and needs improvement in server management and application monitoring. VMware Tanzu Observability by Wavefront offers significant ROI to users by identifying and resolving issues faster, reducing downtime, and optimizing resource utilization, making it the preferred solution.
"No issues with stability."
"People are very pleased with the implementation."
"The features I find most valuable is the querying and alerting capabilities."
"The solution is great for virtualization and preparing the infrastructure in Tanzu to test products. It's very fast and has good visibility."
"VMware comes with a support team, and if you have trouble, you can easily create a ticket, and VMware will help you. Therefore, the best aspect is the support."
"This solution allows me to have true visibility for any metrics when it comes to my cloud, and private."
"Tanzu itself, integrated with multiple solutions, bestows support and security upon a container platform, especially when it comes to managing open-source container platforms such as Kubernetes."
"For us, the ease of deployment in combination with TMZ was the most important part because we don't have to manually deploy a complex monitoring solution. We can more or less do that with the click of a button, and we are not dependent on the developers to provide us with all the necessary features and functions to make that work. We can just deploy it on a workload cluster and monitor at least a good part of the workload. If we want to go into detail, we clearly need to make changes, but for a good part of application monitoring, it gives us good insights."
"The user interface is good enough."
"It is stable."
"The interactive mapping interface for scrolling, zooming, and drilling down on an element to learn about a network issue is good. When we see a network there will sometimes be a spot that has one link. You can go into a particular part of the topology map, scroll in, and see exactly which module it is."
"The threshold alerting is the most valuable feature."
"Auto scanning is most valuable. It looks for rogue devices on your network."
"The solution effectively monitors network devices and servers."
"It handles the basics of monitoring."
"This is a good, stable network monitoring solution for devices."
"It could use a URL document server. Everything in the market is moving towards automation and everybody's looking for the single click operations as well relational data locality."
"The documentation and integration with Kubernetes could be improved."
"I would like to see integration with Kubernetes cluster and APIs so that you can manage the entire stack."
"The main problem I have is that the license cost is very high."
"The initial setup should be easier and more seamless."
"They could make it more easy to plug-in data so that a nontechnical person will be able to use it, like accountants or finance people. That way they don't have to ask us."
"The implementation is a long process that should be improved."
"Its billing model is consumption-based. I understand the consumption-based model, but it is not necessarily easy to estimate and guess how many points or how much we are going to consume on a specific application up until we get to that point. So, for us, it would be helpful to have more insights or predictability into what we can expect from a cost perspective if we are starting to use specific features. This can potentially also drive our consumption a bit more."
"We can never achieve or get a good picture of the network topology."
"The point system is not clear and clarity around this would improve our understanding of the system."
"The new release cadence needs to be improved. It takes a while for them to add new features and functionality. There should be a quicker turnaround with new versions."
"The product is old and not updated."
"Users want SMS available via Whatsapp Gold. They don't want to go through third party SMS servers. The solution should work to make this possible."
"Regional product team support is not very good."
"Integrations with other devices. I want to have a product that has full integration with my active directory so I can track user activity. I want to track my complete user activity, so I'm looking for a product to implement in the near future, which will have full integration with my network and active directory users. It became very difficult to track user activity."
"The interface needs some work."
More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pricing and Cost Advice →
VMware Aria Operations for Applications is ranked 32nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 9 reviews while WhatsUp Gold is ranked 36th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 22 reviews. VMware Aria Operations for Applications is rated 7.6, while WhatsUp Gold is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of VMware Aria Operations for Applications writes "Easy to deploy, worth the money, and helpful for uptime monitoring and performance insights". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WhatsUp Gold writes "If CPU, memory, or disk space is over-utilized, it alerts us immediately via text or email if there is an issue". VMware Aria Operations for Applications is most compared with Grafana, Dynatrace, Datadog, Zabbix and Prometheus, whereas WhatsUp Gold is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, Grafana, PRTG Network Monitor and Nagios XI. See our VMware Aria Operations for Applications vs. WhatsUp Gold report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.